What is your answer?
The analogy of the man wearing red-tinted glasses, in which experience gives the matter or content of the vision a posteriori but the glasses give the red form a priori
{ 1 } - when applied to causality illustrates Kant's theory that the form of causality is contributed by the mind.
{ 2 } - Does not symbolize Kant's theory that we do not know things in themselves.
{ 3 } - is meant to be an example in which what the subject is, is determined by the object.
{ 4 } - is like the judgment 2+2 = 4, in that this judgment is derived from experience.
{ 5 } - does not symbolize the reason of why the judgments of mathematics are universal and necessary.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 5.
1 is correct!
The analogy of the man wearing red-tinted glasses, in which experience gives the matter or content of the vision a posteriori but the glasses give the red form a priori
{ 1 } - when applied to causality illustrates Kant's theory that the form of causality is contributed by the mind.
{ 2 } - Does not symbolize Kant's theory that we do not know things in themselves.
{ 3 } - is meant to be an example in which what the subject is, is determined by the object.
{ 4 } - is like the judgment 2+2 = 4, in that this judgment is derived from experience.
{ 5 } - does not symbolize the reason of why the judgments of mathematics are universal and necessary.
See p. 228.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
2 is wrong. Please try again.
The analogy of the man wearing red-tinted glasses, in which experience gives the matter or content of the vision a posteriori but the glasses give the red form a priori
{ 1 } - when applied to causality illustrates Kant's theory that the form of causality is contributed by the mind.
{ 2 } - Does not symbolize Kant's theory that we do not know things in themselves.
{ 3 } - is meant to be an example in which what the subject is, is determined by the object.
{ 4 } - is like the judgment 2+2 = 4, in that this judgment is derived from experience.
{ 5 } - does not symbolize the reason of why the judgments of mathematics are universal and necessary.
Yes it does. See p. 227.
<= back | menu | forward =>
3 is wrong. Please try again.
The analogy of the man wearing red-tinted glasses, in which experience gives the matter or content of the vision a posteriori but the glasses give the red form a priori
{ 1 } - when applied to causality illustrates Kant's theory that the form of causality is contributed by the mind.
{ 2 } - Does not symbolize Kant's theory that we do not know things in themselves.
{ 3 } - is meant to be an example in which what the subject is, is determined by the object.
{ 4 } - is like the judgment 2+2 = 4, in that this judgment is derived from experience.
{ 5 } - does not symbolize the reason of why the judgments of mathematics are universal and necessary.
No, the opposite is true--the perceived redness of the object is derived from the subject.
<= back | menu | forward =>
4 is wrong. Please try again.
The analogy of the man wearing red-tinted glasses, in which experience gives the matter or content of the vision a posteriori but the glasses give the red form a priori
{ 1 } - when applied to causality illustrates Kant's theory that the form of causality is contributed by the mind.
{ 2 } - Does not symbolize Kant's theory that we do not know things in themselves.
{ 3 } - is meant to be an example in which what the subject is, is determined by the object.
{ 4 } - is like the judgment 2+2 = 4, in that this judgment is derived from experience.
{ 5 } - does not symbolize the reason of why the judgments of mathematics are universal and necessary.
No, the synthetic judgment here is a priori according to Kant because the form comes from the mind, not from experience.
<= back | menu | forward =>
5 is wrong. Please try again.
The analogy of the man wearing red-tinted glasses, in which experience gives the matter or content of the vision a posteriori but the glasses give the red form a priori
{ 1 } - when applied to causality illustrates Kant's theory that the form of causality is contributed by the mind.
{ 2 } - Does not symbolize Kant's theory that we do not know things in themselves.
{ 3 } - is meant to be an example in which what the subject is, is determined by the object.
{ 4 } - is like the judgment 2+2 = 4, in that this judgment is derived from experience.
{ 5 } - does not symbolize the reason of why the judgments of mathematics are universal and necessary.
Yes, it does; the man with the glasses will see everything as red.
<= back | menu | forward =>
the end